Jump to content
Yurolov

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K

Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Not my experience, I got better looking footage with the older sensor in all lighting conditions. Specially in dim light (I shoot a lot of murky interiors and lights is not an option).

But its great that others like it and I'm happy for you :)

The more that gets to enjoy the Blackmagics the better. I might buy one again in a year or so when they can be had cheap on the used market.

One really positive thing I can say about the new sensor is that SOOC with a in camera LUT looks very good. 

I will say the classic BM cams have more of a "romantic" look straight out of the camera. To use guitar amp terminology, the BMPCC4K is more of a "transparent" image, clean and detailed, that you can put any look you want on after the fact. With the OG Pocket/Micro, you have one choice - "that look"... but damn, that look is sexy as hell, and I'll love it forever ;) 

By the way, as a fanboy note, I've enjoyed your videos for years, you're my favorite camera reviewer!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

Again not my experience. The new sensor is tricky to get different looks on because it behaved very weirdly compared to other cameras Ive tried. Just a personal experience.

I guess they are simply different and suitable for different styles. Simply not my cup of tea and others milage may vary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't mean the sharpness (the old pocket and micro, is also surprisingly good in the sharpness) but the colours, the highlights, the contrast. This seems to be more organic or more natural with the old sensor. So the internal process, the conversion from analog to digital, is fantastic. 
Too much digital, makes it look video, and that's the case with the new Pocket. The digital look, doesn't change after colorgrading, it remains there because the internal process in the camera (the conversion from analog to digital) is no longer manipulable afterwards, because it comes from the sensor as it comes.

Is my statement so correct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frankly, too much nitpicking pixel peeping...

Join the black bars and enjoy the part in-between and realistically closer to the senses no matter the customary blah blah

...before the classic has come from local store camera exchange. Looks like when sinners die to born Saints 1 minute later if so.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, I haven't pixel peeped or nitpicked because it gets me nowhere. My tip is to choose the tool that suites you the best over all. It's not rocket science and should be fairly obvious.

Endlessly going over minor details kills creativity for me. Anyway, since I no longer own this camera I will leave the thread for those that do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Anyway, since I no longer own this camera I will leave the thread for those that do.

If everyone thought this way, the thread would be like 7 pages long. 

I'm looking forward to seeing your comparison video - if you're working on one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

If everyone thought this way, the thread would be like 7 pages long. 

From the 400 pages there are less than 50 with useful information, maybe it should be that way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4K is a bitch. Certain stuff without necessary care mentioned by Dennis @deezid for example here if/when shot on 4K becomes truly better from 1080p outcome. 35mm film projection is lower resolution, as for instance.

 

Take a look on this thread:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?59036-Resolution-of-35mm-film-and-70mm-IMAX-film&s=1226f26dbbd98e6978e23f1094de482d&p=768383&viewfull=1#post768383

That Sir David Mullen's figure by RED tests -- he said something such as IIRC but I recall it as 3.2K as matter of fact. BTW never achieved @ screening room, let's make it clear and such a point.

 

There's still three different links there to address interesting papers to read on topic:

http://www.motionfx.gr/files/35mm_resolution_english.pdf

http://www.tmax100.com/photo/pdf/film.pdf

https://www.healio.com/ophthalmology/optics/news/print/ocular-surgery-news/{8c0eb2a6-586c-4670-a8c4-ad1ad012aad1}/expert-considers-limits-of-visual-acuity-visibility-and-optical-performance-of-human-eye

 

Without mention these both two entries:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?59036-Resolution-of-35mm-film-and-70mm-IMAX-film&p=1839943&viewfull=1#post183994

 

Finally, once again:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?59036-Resolution-of-35mm-film-and-70mm-IMAX-film&p=1840009&viewfull=1#post1840009

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, StHubbins said:

4K isn't a big deal to me EXCEPT... the fact that you can zoom in means every prime is turned into a mini-zoom lens.

And that is awesome.

And whatever you don't crop you're downscaling, which improves the real resolution.  

8K will be great from this perspective too.  Think of it - you'll be able to get real 4K!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kye said:

And whatever you don't crop you're downscaling, which improves the real resolution.  

8K will be great from this perspective too.  Think of it - you'll be able to get real 4K!

Man, this is why 8K is appealing to me but I don’t want to think what I need to edit 8K footage. CFast and express cards better drop in price a lot in the next 4 years.

Even H265 10bit 8K is pretty hefty and most people will want to shoot in ProRes RAW. 

Honestly—the way we consume media—mostly YouTube or Vimeo with highly compressed h264 or h265 streams on mobile devices, 4K with a 1080p deliverable is still plenty good. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Video Hummus said:

Man, this is why 8K is appealing to me but I don’t want to think what I need to edit 8K footage. CFast and express cards better drop in price a lot in the next 4 years.

Even H265 10bit 8K is pretty hefty and most people will want to shoot in ProRes RAW. 

Honestly—the way we consume media—mostly YouTube or Vimeo with highly compressed h264 or h265 streams on mobile devices, 4K with a 1080p deliverable is still plenty good. 

Braw works really smooth.  Prores for that matter as well. Really happy for the latitude when grading and the lack of macro blocking too.

Resolve is your friend. Otherwise it is hard to get the most out of the camera. Especially with the lack of adobe support for braw.

I was really impressed with the sharpness of cdng raw. A pitty it got axed. Not that I was using it that often. But nice to have the option.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CinemaDNG and 4K is closer to true 4K
BRAW and 4K is about 10% less.

Therefore, 1080p and CinemaDNG is a very good 1080p. So CinemaDNG with 1080p is about as good as BRAW with 4K scaled to 1080p (in terms of sharpness). 

This is our result. We compared both cameras (old and new Pocket).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of CinemaDNG and the Pocket 4k... Can't you just rollback the firmware if you want CinemaDNG on the Pocket 4K?

NOT if you have the latest hardware revision with the new LCD screen.

If you recently purchased a Pocket 4k and it came with 6.2.1 factory installed then you will not be able to rollback the firmware to 6.1 to get CinemaDNG.  I purchased mine new just over a month ago.  It came with 6.2.1.  I was not able to roll back the firmware.

I spoke with Blackmagic and they said that they have switched to a new LCD screen, which is only compatible with 6.2.1 (and higher).  If you have the new LCD BRAW only Pocket 4k you will get a message that says your firmware is up to date.  I did when I tried to install 5.2 or 6.1.  Blackmagic also said that if I were to "force it" (whatever that means?) to go back to 6.1,  I could brick the camera.

Why does it matter?

For many it won't, but for some who want the CinemaDNG's highlight control available in the Camera RAW tab on Resolve that is not offered with BRAW, this will be an issue.  Also, for those who want a higher resolution image compared to BRAW, CinemaDNG was a good option.

5 hours ago, osmanovic said:

CinemaDNG and 4K is closer to true 4K
BRAW and 4K is about 10% less.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...